|Does a beginner notice||tmotz|
Nov 29, 2002 5:39 PM
|the difference in components from Sora compared to Ultegra.
I don't know if I will every race,so wonder if its worth spending the money on it.For the money I can get a entry level road bike and cross bike.
|you will notice... get at least 105||benja15|
Nov 29, 2002 5:51 PM
|i think sora has a top click for switching gears opposed to the (i beleive it starts at tiagra) tiagra and up shifting style. There are noticable differences especially with wear. I would say go for 105 at least|
|re: Does a beginner notice||Snyder|
Nov 29, 2002 7:44 PM
|I have been riding a year and a half consistantly. I have SORA on my secondary road bike, and Ultegra on my Main bike. This year I have put 1000 or so miles on the SORA, and about 6000 so far on the Ultegra. The Sora is not as smooth shifting as the Ultegra but works very well. I have ridden 70+ mile club rides on the bike with Sora and have no complaints. I think if you are going to ride 50 or 70 miles a week Sora or Tiagra will probably be enough. However, if you have any ambition at all to ride 150 or 200 miles in a week, definatly get the better bike.
|re: Does a beginner notice||fbg111|
Nov 29, 2002 9:14 PM
|When I was shopping around this summer, the most consistent advice I was given was, if you're going to race, get at least 105. I have no experience with any other shifters, but I'll pass that on fwiw.|
|re: Does a beginner notice||LC|
Nov 29, 2002 9:22 PM
|I started with RSX which used to be Shimano's bottom of the line road stuff and it was fine but they don't make things like they used to. RSX was heavy but solid built. I don't think Sora is built quite as well with all the plastic and it hard to upgrade to 9 speed, so I would say to start with at least Tiagra. If you are pretty sure you will ride alot then go 105.|
|bikes have to be nice.................||mealex|
Nov 29, 2002 10:43 PM
|and tiagra is not nice. you'll not be bouncing like tigger, but moaning as eyeore......treat your one bike to nice workings.|
|IMO, 105's worth it but Ultegra is iffy||retro|
Dec 1, 2002 4:58 PM
|One of the good things about Shimano is that the low line stuff works pretty well, but friends who've had Tiagra say that's about one step farther down than you want to go. FWIW, my Atlantis is set up with a mix of mostly LX and XT mountain stuff, and it's worked without a blip for two years/4800 miles.
Ultegra costs quite a bit more than 105, and I dunno if I can feel the difference.
|re: Does a beginner notice||Hamsta|
Dec 27, 2002 2:01 PM
If you are upgrading from an older bike with friction shifters I can say that the jump from that to any STI index gearing will be so great you'll probably be quite happy with Sora. I've seen a lot of comments dissing Sora as being drastically inferior to Tiagra, etc, but let's be honest - compared to friction shifters it's a revelation! I finally buried my 16 year old road bike about 3 months ago and got a Trek 1000 (with Sora gearing) for commuting to work (about 90km/56km per week). The difference is worlds apart, and I have been literally saying "Why didn't I do this sooner?" I'm sure if you're racing the smaller differences in performance and wt between Sora, Tiagra, 105, etc are much more important, but from a commuter/recreational stand-point I can't see them being worth the additional outlay.
So, IMHO if you're not going to be racing I would think that an entry level road bike should be more than adequate.